A common assumption or perception of the American public is that it is impossible to fire a government employee, thus society is stuck with either incompetent or lazy public employees.
In your opinion, what is it in the process that makes it so difficult to fire poor performers? What can you do about it?
Studtnet (1) answer.
From my personal experience in the government I can’t recall seeing any of my colleagues every being fired. They have been written up and suspended but never fired. As a government employee you are protected from being fired for without cause. This means that the agency terminating you must provide you evidence for why they are terminating you. Also government employees are protected from being fired based solely on their political affiliation. Trying to fire someone for poor work performance is a long tedious process. Part of this is because anyone who is underperforming must first be given the opportunity to improve. Then if it continues it’s the agencies responsibility to document and prove that the employee is underperforming against set standards. Lastly, as a manager it reflects poorly on you if you are constantly firing your employees. No manage wants to look as if they cannot control their staff.
In trying to improve the process a suggestion that I have is for the government to create an easier process for which managers can classify if an employee is not meeting their work responsibilities. Also legislation needs to be passed that allows for the termination process to be speed up when dealing with certain egregious work violations. Also I feel that legislation should be based that looks to hold civil servants accountable when they do not meet their ethical responsibilities. Lastly, I feel that managers need more support from higher officials in their respective agencies when termination is necessary.
Question (2).
Evidentiary Administrative Adjudication
What is evidentiary administrative adjudication? What are some of the criticisms? Have you ever been involved in this process? If so, please share your experience.
Student (2) answer.
Evidentiary Administrative Adjudication is a process in which disputes against individuals or corporations are resolved based on their rights and obligations through provided evidence in a hearing. Its ability to enforce regulations, resolve conflicts, and create efficient performance make it a top choice for convenience and its ability to achieve fairness through procedural due process; however, criticisms against this process do exist. There is concern over its motives and whether there is deceptive intentions within the process. There is also concern over the inconsistency that exists among adjudicatory decisions.
Another large concern stems from Adjudication’s habit of incorrectly being substituted for rulemaking. Adjudication is meant to be used with retrospect and in specific settings, where rulemaking focuses on the legislative side of law. However, there are times in cases where new laws and situations arise causing a need for rulemaking, yet adjudication is used instead. Because of the frequency in which this occurs many have drawn criticism about its use.
Question (3).
Heckler v. Campbell (1983)
The U.S. Supreme Court case Heckler V. Campbell (1983) involved Carmen Campbell who was denied social security disability benefits by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The administrative law judge in the case, who relied on agency grid regulations (grid regs) determined that Carmen was not eligible for benefits because she was not disabled. Jobs existed in the market that she could perform. The Court found in favor of Campbell. On what grounds? What is the disadvantage of using grid regulations to determine disability? What advantages does adjudication offer over rulemaking?
Student (3) answer.
In the Heckler v. Campbell case we read about Carmen Campbell, a 52 year old Maid seeking social security disability benefits by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. After being denied by an Administrative Law Judge on the grounds that she could still perform “light” amounts of work, the Court of Appeals reversed this ruling on the grounds that no alternative jobs that Campbell could perform were specified. This made it impossible for her to provide evidence in proving that she was incapable of performing these alternative jobs; therefore, it was on the grounds of a lack of substantial evidence that the courts found ground for a reversal.
The Judge had declared this ruling based off the use of grid regulations which are charts that essentially line your age, your type of disability, and your education level within columns and from there your level of disability and ability to work is determined. This system may be effective for efficiency and speed, however, its ability to read individual cases, and assess information based on individual evidence is lacking. It is a system based solely on clear cut information being forced into a predetermined set of outcomes.
The advantages that adjudication offers over rulemaking is its ability to exercise judicial powers within an administrative agency versus rulemaking’s legislative process of creating and enforcing regulations. Rulemaking has a continual process of making rules, defining them, enforcing them, etc. It is a structured and efficient moving process that allows for dozens of rules to be created a day. The adjudication process allows for those rules to be analyzed in a Formal and Informal settings. These processes allow for witnesses, gathered facts, and personal information to fall within the decision making process, allowing for a more accurate and ethical outcome.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]
